Breaking down anonymity: digital surveillance of irregular migrants in Germany and the Netherlands

Because borders alone cannot stop irregular migration, the European Union is turning more and more to internal control measures. Through surveillance, member states aim to exclude irregular migrants from societal institutions, thereby discouraging their stay or deporting those who are apprehended. And yet, states cannot expel immigrants who remain anonymous. Identification has thus become key. Breaking Down Anonymity shows how digital surveillance is becoming a prime instrument of identification and exclusion policies towards irregular migrants. To support this claim, the study charts policy developments in Germany and the Netherlands. It analyses both countries' labour market controls as well as their detention and expulsion practices. Also examined is the development of several new EU migration databases. Spanning the Continent, these information systems create a new European Union frontier - one that is digital, biometric and ever-strengthening.Deze studie onderzoekt de hypothese dat digitale surveillance een steeds belangrijker instrument wordt voor de identificatie en uitsluiting van illegalen. Het onderzoek richt zich op de beleidsontwikkelingen in Nederland en Duitsland op de arbeidsmarkt, in de vreemdelingendetentie en het uitzettingsbeleid en analyseert de nieuwe biometrische migratie databanken van de EU

Breaking Down Anonymity

Because borders alone cannot stop irregular migration, the European Union is turning more and more to internal control measures. Through surveillance, member states aim to exclude irregular migrants from societal institutions, thereby discouraging their stay or deporting those who are apprehended. And yet, states cannot expel immigrants who remain anonymous. Identification has thus become key. Breaking Down Anonymity shows how digital surveillance is becoming a prime instrument of identification and exclusion policies towards irregular migrants. To support this claim, the study charts policy developments in Germany and the Netherlands. It analyses both countries' labour market controls as well as their detention and expulsion practices. Also examined is the development of several new EU migration databases. Spanning the Continent, these information systems create a new European Union frontier - one that is digital, biometric and ever-strengthening

The Public Core of the Internet: An international Agenda for Internet Governance

The growth and health of our digital economies and societies depend on the core protocols and infrastructure of the Internet. This technical and logical substructure of our digital existence is now in need of protection against unwarranted interference in order to sustain the growth and the integrity of the global Internet. The Internet's key protocols and infrastructure can be considered a global public good that provides benefits to everyone in the world. Countering the growing state interference with this 'public core of the Internet' requires a new international agenda for Internet governance that departs from the notion of a global public good. Core ingredients of this strategy are: - To establish and disseminate an international norm stipulating that the Internet's public core - its main protocols and infrastructure- should be considered a neutral zone, safeguarded against unwarranted intervention by governments. - To advocate efforts to clearly differentiate at the national and international level between Internet security (security of the Internet infrastructure) and national security (security through the Internet). - To broaden the arena for cyber diplomacy to include new coalitions of states (including the so called 'swing states') and private companies, including the large Internet companies as well as Internet intermediaries such as Internet Service Providers

Governing Cyberspace: Behavior, Power and Diplomacy

Cyber norms and other ways to regulate responsible state behavior in cyberspace is a fast-moving political and diplomatic field. The academic study of these processes is varied and interdisciplinary, but much of the literature has been organized according to discipline. Seeking to cross disciplinary boundaries, this timely book brings together researchers in fields ranging from international law, international relations, and political science to business studies and philosophy to explore the theme of responsible state behavior in cyberspace. . Divided into three parts, Governing Cyberspace first looks at current debates in and about international law and diplomacy in cyberspace. How does international law regulate state behaviour and what are its limits? How do cyber superpowers like China and Russia shape their foreign policy in relation to cyberspace? The second focuses on power and governance. What is the role for international organisations like NATO or for substate actors like intelligence agencies? How do they adapt to the realities of cyberspace and digital conflict? How does the classic balance of power play out in cyberspace and how do different states position themselves? The third part takes a critical look at multistakeholder and corporate diplomacy. How do global tech companies shape their role as norm entrepreneurs in cyberspace, and how do their cyber diplomatic efforts relate to their corporate identity

Het geheim in de informatiesamenleving

Wie kan er nog een geheim bewaren in een wereld waarin alles en iedereen verbonden is door technologie die erop gericht is personen, objecten, bewegingen, relaties, smaken en voorkeuren in kaart en in verband met elkaar te brengen? De mogelijkheid om geheimen te bewaren staat in de informatiesamenleving onder druk. Dat geldt zowel voor het individu als voor de geheimen van de staat. Dat is een zorgelijke ontwikkeling want geheimen zijn zowel een fundament van de individuele vrijheid als een essentieel onderdeel van het functioneren van de staat. Voor het individu geldt dat het geheim gered moet worden van de toegenomen digitale transparantie, terwijl voor de staat geldt dat de legitieme functie van het geheim gered moet worden van een ontspoorde cultuur van geheimhouding. Bovendien brengt de moderne digitale technologie zelf een nieuwe laag van geheimzinnigheid aan in ons dagelijks leven. De kenbaarheid van de systemen en applicaties die de informatiesamenleving sturen is minder vanzelfsprekend dan we vaak denken

In Search of Digital Sovereignty and Strategic Autonomy: Normative Power Europe to the Test of Its Geopolitical Ambitions

This article analyses the recent use of European Union (EU) terminology of digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy, aiming to identify tensions between policy considerations of fundamental rights, free market principles and geopolitical concerns. These tensions are rooted in the disparity between the EU's considerable economic and regulatory power in digital matters and its limited mandate and capabilities in foreign policy. The article also explores the translation of the notions of digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy into EU policy. It identifies three important trends in the geopoliticisation of the EU agenda on digital technologies: (1) the instrumental use of ‘classic’ internal market policies to exert geopolitical influence; (2) the imposition of foreign policy imperatives on national markets; and (3) new ‘hybrid’ digital policies that combine internal market concerns, fundamental rights and geopolitical concerns. Ultimately, digital sovereignty has inherent tensions with the EU's normative power in digital issues and may also result in a strategic cacophony

Revisiting past cyber operations in light of new cyber norms and interpretations of international law:: inching towards lines in the sand?

This article traces the evolution of interpretations of international law and international cyber norms on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace by reassessing five major – and allegedly state-led – cyber operations: Stuxnet 2010; Belgacom 2013-2014, the Ukrainian power grid 2015, the US presidential election 2016, and NotPetya 2017. Taking recent normative developments and emerging state practices as primary points of refence, it investigates how the current normative landscape can shed light on the nature, (il)legitimacy, and (un)lawfulness of these past operations. For each case, the analysis engages with: i) the elements triggering the violation of norms, principles and international law; ii) the legal and normative significance of recent sources of norms and interpretations of international law; and iii) the legal and political obstacles still lying beyond their application. Taken together, the reassessment of these cyber operations reveals how, in hindsight, the international community has come a long way in calibrating its normative language and practices in calling out irresponsible behaviour in cyberspace. With states taking small, but unprecedented, steps through public attributions and statements on international law in cyberspace, most of the past cyber operations analysed here would arguably feature an attribution in the current climate. At the same time, substantial differences in national interpretations of international law continue to stand in the way of clarity on the terms of its application. In light of this, this article ultimately suggests that cyber norms and the interpretations of international law require further granularity to become ‘lines in the sand’

Artificial intelligence and international conflict in cyberspace: Exploring three sets of issues

What is at stake with the use of automation in international conflict in cyberspace through AI? This introductory chapter outlines the main themes, objectives, and rationale of the volume with the ambition of delineating a comprehensive perspective on the relationship between AI and international conflict in cyberspace. It does so by introducing the three sets of issues around which the volume has been organised: (1) technical and operational, (2) strategic and geopolitical, and (3) normative and legal. By highlighting the main debates for each of these issues, this chapter also contextualises the volume’s contributions into broader debates about challenges and opportunities brought by AI technology. In so doing, the chapter argues that only by understanding the relationship between AI and conflict in cyberspace as a comprehensive phenomenon and embedded in broader geopolitical conflicts, can the international community truly move forward with meaningful regulation. In its concluding part, this chapter also draws a state-of-the-art account of how the debate on emerging technologies, and AI specifically, has (not) evolved in the context of the recent multilateral processes at the United Nations (GGE and OEWG)

Artificial Intelligence and International Conflict in Cyberspace

This edited volume explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming international conflict in cyberspace. Over the past three decades, cyberspace developed into a crucial frontier and issue of international conflict. However, scholarly work on the relationship between AI and conflict in cyberspace has been produced along somewhat rigid disciplinary boundaries and an even more rigid sociotechnical divide – wherein technical and social scholarship are seldomly brought into a conversation. This is the first volume to address these themes through a comprehensive and cross-disciplinary approach. With the intent of exploring the question ‘what is at stake with the use of automation in international conflict in cyberspace through AI?’, the chapters in the volume focus on three broad themes, namely: (1) technical and operational, (2) strategic and geopolitical and (3) normative and legal. These also constitute the three parts in which the chapters of this volume are organised, although these thematic sections should not be considered as an analytical or a disciplinary demarcation

Cybersecurity and the politics of knowledge production: towards a reflexive practice

How does a reflexive scholarly practice matter for producing useful cybersecurity knowledge and policy? We argue that staking relevance without engaging in reflexivity diminishes the usefulness of knowledge produced both in academia and in policy. To advance a reflexive research agenda in cybersecurity, this forum offers a collective interrogation of the liminal positionality of the cybersecurity scholar. We examine the politics of ‘the making of’ cybersecurity expertise as knowledge practitioners who are located across and in between the diverse and overlapping fields of academia, diplomacy and policy. Cybersecurity expertise, and the practices of the cybersecurity epistemic community more broadly, rely heavily on the perceived applicability and actionability of knowledge outputs, on the practical dependency on policy practitioners regarding access, and thus on the continuous negotiation of hierarchies of knowledge. Participants in this forum reflect on their research practice of negotiating such dilemmas. Collectively, we draw on these contributions to identify obstacles and opportunities towards realising a reflexive research practice in cybersecurity